# Laphroaig Quarter Cask



## Dr. Stogie Fresh (Nov 18, 2005)

I got to try a dram of Laphroaig Quarter Cask Single malt scotch while at the RTDA in Houston. I really loved the stuff and want to buy some. Not a strong scotch but it has a really long and substantial finish.

Anybody else tried this?

Doc


----------



## chibnkr (May 2, 2007)

I've never seen it, but am a big fan of the smoky/peaty single malts (e.g., Laphroig, Talisker, Lagavulin, etc.). What's the age on this?


----------



## Funnymantrip (Oct 28, 2004)

They don't give a specific age on the website. They do hint that it is a bit older than the 10, but the main marketing is the fact it is produced in the smaller cask. Have not had it, but would love to try it.


----------



## GAW (May 25, 2007)

I have a bottle and really think its better than the 10 or 15yr Laphroig. Jim Murray in the 2006 Whisky Bible rates it 95vs 92 for the 10yr. To me it is more intense and has great peat/malt balance.One of my favorites! :alJerry


----------



## Che (Dec 4, 2003)

Funnymantrip said:


> They don't give a specific age on the website. They do hint that it is a bit older than the 10, but the main marketing is the fact it is produced in the smaller cask. Have not had it, but would love to try it.


I was under the impression it was younger than the 10 year old versions - but maturation was thought greater because of the cask's different (and smaller) dimensions.

Personally I think the QC is a tad more complex than the standard 10 but not sure I can say that about the 10CS. I also find the QC milder on the peat and Islay smoke than either of the 10's. However, the barrel influence appears greatest on the QC when comparing the 3. 
JMHO


----------



## Dr. Stogie Fresh (Nov 18, 2005)

Thanks for the comments guys. I really have to buy some of this. I just wanted to confirm my initial impression. It's a real winner!

Doc


----------



## adsantos13 (Oct 10, 2006)

Chè said:


> I was under the impression it was younger than the 10 year old versions - but maturation was thought greater because of the cask's different (and smaller) dimensions.
> 
> Personally I think the QC is a tad more complex than the standard 10 but not sure I can say that about the 10CS. I also find the QC milder on the peat and Islay smoke than either of the 10's. However, the barrel influence appears greatest on the QC when comparing the 3.
> JMHO


:tpd:

Spot on, Che.

I love the QC, then again Laphroaig is probably my favorite single malt.


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

Chè said:


> I was under the impression it was younger than the 10 year old versions - but maturation was thought greater because of the cask's different (and smaller) dimensions.
> 
> Personally I think the QC is a tad more complex than the standard 10 but not sure I can say that about the 10CS. *I also find the QC milder on the peat *and Islay smoke than either of the 10's. However, the barrel influence appears greatest on the QC when comparing the 3.
> JMHO


In general I find Laphroaig a little too heavy on the peat for me, but I do enjoy it. Lagavulin is just heavy enough peat wise for my taste without becoming overwhelming. I'll look for this Laphroaig QC - looks like it might be right up my alley. Thanks.

BillyBarue


----------



## Matthew (Aug 28, 2007)

Chè said:


> I was under the impression it was younger than the 10 year old versions - but maturation was thought greater because of the cask's different (and smaller) dimensions.
> 
> Personally I think the QC is a tad more complex than the standard 10 but not sure I can say that about the 10CS. I also find the QC milder on the peat and Islay smoke than either of the 10's. However, the barrel influence appears greatest on the QC when comparing the 3.
> JMHO


I agree. The QC is more complex while the peat and smoke are more subdued. The 15 is even more subtle. If you just want that kick in the face of peat, you can't beat the regular 10.

For me, the QC is my preference.


----------

